Rugby columnist

Has Ewen McKenzie provided Robbie Deans with the plans to beat the Lions? He's certainly provided one way of troubling them, but we'll see a very different game plan on Tuesday week when Jake White sends out his Brumbies to take on the tourists.

No non-Test side has beaten the Lions since NZ Maori in 2005, but White and co will already be scheming. He might have just lost Scott Sio, Pat McCabe and Peter Kimlin to the Wallabies, but with Matt Toomua, Henry Speight, Jesse Mogg and Tevita Kuridrani up his sleeve and a pack that will be aggressive and exceptionally well-drilled, the Brumbies could ask a few different questions than the Reds but will be no less demanding. Is it an audition for the Wallabies?

Such is the state of play that what McKenzie, White and Deans chose for breakfast is being examined as evidence for their suitability. The Reds were outstanding last Saturday night and McKenzie has already articulated an appealing vision for the national side. Now, White will have his say. Deans will probably need bits and pieces from both, because just one way of playing is not going to be enough against this balanced Lions side.

Inside the numbers

Advertisement

Fairfax Media has teamed up with Accenture for the duration of the Lions tour, and they are supplying us with an array of statistics and graphs after each game. Additionally, they have come up with a player index, which we will let them explain: ''The performance index is a function of each player's actions and position on the field. A value is assigned to the multitude of actions (kick points, metres gained) and positive play yields positive values while negative play yields negative values. These values are then weighted based on the importance of the action and its impact on the game. A player's performance index number is the total of these values at any point in time. Therefore the better they play the higher the performance index and vice versa.'' So, the player with the highest player index number on Saturday? It was Quade Cooper, followed by Ben Youngs, Luke Morahan, Owen Farrell and Nick Frisby.

What the papers say

The ''spying'' allegations naturally find a home in the British and Irish sports pages, but it is the growing concerns caused by the Lions' injury list that is furrowing most brows. Under the headline ''Gatland sweating on injury to fly-half Jonny Sexton,'' the Telegraph's Mick Cleary reports that the Lions' policy of taking only two No.10s on tour has resulted in the cotton-wool treatment for Sexton and Owen Farrell. Neither have been named in the 23 to take on the Combined Country side in Newcastle on Tuesday, and an injury to either would leave the Lions badly exposed with the first Test fast approaching.

In the same paper, Brian O'Driscoll writes what everyone was thinking - the pace of the Reds game in Brisbane was breathtaking. So much so it even took the home side by surprise. ''The early pace of the game on Saturday night was extraordinary. A couple of the Reds guys were wondering themselves how they could sustain such a tempo.'' Meanwhile, the entertaining Stuart Barnes is feeling bullish, writing that the power of George North combined with some Irish back-line invention will be too much for the Wallabies. ''This merger of brute force and brilliance is ready to take the men in red over the gainline and from there it is only a few giant strides to Lions immortality,'' he writes in his Sunday Times column.

Tweet of the day

''Nice little ear tuck compliments of the lions boys #hadnochoice #matesrates #pretty'' Reds warrior @BennyLucas87 tweets about his stitched-up ear following the Suncorp clash, complete with picture. All we can say is that it looks like it would sting a bit.

Quote of the day

6 comments so far

Paul your ascertion that Ewen may have given Robbie the blue print to beat the Lions is flawed in a number of respects; Firstly the Reds lost, secondly the team the Lions fielded is not the team that will play in the first test, thirdly you are assuming Ewen came up with the game plan, perhaps Robbie gave the blueprint to Ewen? Why are you and all the media so fixated on Quade Cooper, he was vunerable in his last outing against then ABs' , you keep saying he is brilliant, his combination with Genia is match winning, the Reds are not winning the comp, against a injury ravaged Rebels Quade was the culprit and if he had of done the same against the Lions in a Test the wallabies would have played a mighty price.Carlos Spencer comes to mind every time I watch Quade , Carlos was a prodigious super rugby player, however in a test match enviroment was found wanting on a number of instances not through his inability to play but his inability to play within a team structure.Within the player performance index who decides what, who made the most mistakes in the Reds v Lions game for the Reds?

Commenter

Taffy

Location

Ingleburn

Date and time

June 11, 2013, 9:50AM

Yeah everything is Quade's fault. Other tens never make any mistakes. They are all just so perfect. Except for Quade of course. He always does everything wrong. Just going on the field is wrong eh Taff . We get it. You hate Quade because he is far far more successful than you will ever be. Geez I'd hate to be you dog, or your sheep when you've had a bad day and Quade isn't playing.

Oh and kiwi Robbie Deans can do no wrong, to a kiwi eh Taffy. Does Robbie make you feel less lonely in OZ Taff ?

Commenter

johnny-boy

Date and time

June 11, 2013, 2:51PM

Go the wallabies!

Commenter

Nato

Location

Sydney

Date and time

June 11, 2013, 9:59AM

re the Accenture stats, we need way more information about how this works before we can give it any sort of credibility. Of the 'top performing players' you have the two half backs and the two fly halfs... plus Luke Morahan who scored an awesome 70 meter solo try.

Hmm... who would have thought that the half backs and fly halfs were likely to dominate thinngs like 'meters gained' and 'kick points'. Do we know if 'meters gained' for instance includes kicking meters or only meters gained by running, or are those seperate stats ? How do the stats record 'scrum dominance' or line out won / lost... how do they determine if it was the hookers throw, the lifters poor lift, the jumpers mis timed jump or just a great play by the opposition ? Do they account for hospital passes where someone shovels the ball along to a team mate in a worse position, who gets hammered and goes backwards... who gets the blame for that ?

As it stands, that item about the 'top performing players' according to Accenture tells us nothing, other than that fly halfs and half backs get the ball alot more in rugby than anyone else and have a big part to play in the outcome of the game... and that scoring a dazzling solo 70 meter solo try will get you noticed. Thanks Accenture, but I pretty much already knew these things.

Cully, I hope Fairfax media arent paying for those insights... you do know that Accenture are Management Consultants right ? Like their bretheren, their primary move is to tell you things you already knew using fancy 'tools' and 'new technology' and then charge you a motza for doing so.

Commenter

OJP

Location

Perth

Date and time

June 11, 2013, 3:20PM

Stats in this case only confirm what was true, Quade and Luke Moarhan should be both in the Wallabies. Deans is sickenly conservative. Live on your knees or die on your feet. Th e Wallabies will die wondering because that is the problem the , afyter nearly six year the wrong people ask easy questions. Quade you will get there.

Commenter

30mm tags

Location

West End

Date and time

June 11, 2013, 6:11PM

I will also be interested to see how these Accenture stats start to develop and the formula used that will provide both meaning and credibility. But I do like the idea - especially as it may shed better light on some of the low percentage plays that produce negative results.

I am loathe to re-enter the QC and KB debate, seeing as they are not the main topics of this article, but they both provide cases in point. Both players are given the kudos for flashy and brilliant play, but both seem (and I emphasise 'seem' because it is only perception at this stage) to be guilty of doing many low percentage plays in bad positions on the field that directly lead to opponents scoring. The chip kicks, among other low percentage plays, have been the bane of Australian rugby with a number of 'flashy' stars being the main culprits. It would be good to see how often these plays lead to points against.

The Brumbies do not seem to do these plays very often and there for-against stats tends to back this up. With a good use of these stats to actually quantify this we can expose the culprits and get players away from the flash and doing the real moves that actually win games.